Friday, November 30, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 049


Remember how, just a few years ago, Democrats/Liberals were united and determined to take our country back? Then something that was really great changed us to a nasty, back-biting mob – we gained the majority in Congress.

At first it was dancing in the streets, but soon the naysayers and critics took over. Without even a thought to learning how government is run, many Liberals began to criticize their Congressional majority for not stopping the Iraq war instantly and for not doing all the things these critics wanted them to.

While the Repugs in Congress stood together solidly, the Dems splintered, so even with a majority it was difficult to get anything done.
Remember, just because you have the majority does not mean you rule uncontested if you abide by the Constitution. True, Bush has adroitly circumvented laws and the Constitution but he has had the unwavering support of his Party’s supporters.

You get loyalty by being loyal. The Repugs have learned this and it’s time for the rank and file Dems to grow up and smell the votes. Activists that are doing most of the screaming must understand that Senator Lieberman, elected as a Dem but caucusing with Dems, is blackmailing the Senate. Its hands are tied else it loses its majority.

This is the lesson that Dems need to learn and be concerned about:
Why should their elected representative go out on a limb for them when just as soon as they fail or something else comes up from the baser of the base, they know they will be not only deserted but vilified?

So-called Liberal Talk Radio does little to educate the voters about how things work in a democratic government. Many of the hosts are adamantly against some of the Dem candidates while openly pimping for their favorite Liberal. In fact, Liberal Radio is doing exactly what it has consistently criticizes mainstream media for doing.

The mainstream media seldom mentions Kucinich, Biden, Richardson, Dodd or Edwards, concentrating on Hillary and Barack. Liberal talk show hosts and their callers are mostly using the Repug talking points to criticize Clinton. They ignore anything negative about Obama.

What many Liberals fail to realize is that the media is still run by the Republicans who are terrified of Hillary and know they can easily beat Barack who will be slaughtered in the debates by any Repug. Their fear of Hillary is so great that Karl Rove has surfaced to feed lines to her Democratic opponents and Liberal Talk Radio.

While ignoring most of the Dem candidates, mainstream media mavens scrutinize and criticize everything about Clinton, yet allow Obama to skate on his errors and inexperience. But in fairness, there are things about him that should not be ignored. For example:

The Democratic Underground and NY Times are two sources that have noted how Obama considers himself a modern day Joshua and infers that God “walks” with his campaign. If that doesn’t scare the hell out of Democrats, it should. Church and State are separate and should remain that way. Do we really want another president like Bush who claims God directs him?

And just try to find any coverage of how the Obama campaign pays off supporters in Primary States illegally. This is nearly totally ignored by the media and even most of the bloggers.

Now he is being played up mightily on both Liberal and Mainstream media because Oprah is coming to campaign for him. Will 0+0 = 0 or a halo? Will Oprah lift this self-appointed Joshua up to sainthood with the prayers of her vast audience? Whose side is God on in this contest? It is certainly not the voters who want separation of church and state.

Chris Matthews as we’ve mentioned before is dying for Giuliani to win and knows the G. can easily beat the O., so Chris is pulling out all stops to bring down Clinton while indulging in his latest man-crush, Obama.

The Many Man-Crushes of Chris Matthews
Eric Alterman
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, November 23, 2007


Remember how Primary debates used to be handled? There were candidates on the stage who answered questions posed by a moderator. Never did a moderator join the debate. Her/his function was to keep order and ask questions.

It is so different this year as the Cable fat heads, swollen with ego, have entered the debate as de facto advisors, prompters and debaters. Before the debates, moderators of the next debate discuss the campaigns of the candidates with guest analyzers.

Then when the debate is in progress, the moderator may insert himself into the debate with stunning nastiness using his own opinions and script he wrote for his cable program. The idea is to incite a fight, entertain and provide lots of clips to run on the cable programs to hurt one candidate and build up another.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews was first to enter into the debate he was supposed to be moderating but pulled back when the crowd voiced its disapproval. However he continued to script on his program what Obama and Edwards should do to hurt Clinton at the next debate. That one was moderated by Russert who asked questions of Clinton, many of which were based on lies or slanted to misinform.

Viewers from all walks of life were appalled by Russert’s actions as moderator, especially in the debate which took place in Philly with a Matthew’s-packed crowd that was clamoring for Clinton’s blood.

Chris was really pissed off at the criticism and “protested too much” and too often. He claimed that Russert acted the way a moderator should act. Then he further manipulated the debate in subsequent Hardball programs. Typically he played clips only of parts of Hillary’s responses without showing that the questions asked were different.

Following the Nevada debate, Matthews was livid. We’ve seen this side of him before whenever Hillary won. He declared that the moderator, Wolff Blitzer, had been co-opted with threats [even after Wolff denied it] and gave Hillary soft ball questions.

Matthews raged on, declaring that the crowd was fixed, the boos were programmed and the questions were all managed by the Clinton campaign. He showed himself to be the leader of the “Stop Hillary movement”.

In his head, a programmed anti-Hillary audience in Philly was OK but Hillary backers in the audience in Nevada was not. Likewise he often criticizes and complains about Hillary clapping her hands with never a word about the fact that nearly every shot of Barack show him clapping his hands.

He desperately needs Obama to win because O is sure to lose the general election. Chris’s candidate has always been Giuliani and he is terrified that Senator Clinton will win and he knows she can beat him.

He has constantly demonstrated his hatred of everything Clinton. He should be worried. A huge poll taken this week reported that 64% of Democrats believe that Hillary is the only candidate that can win against a Republican. Most realize that Rudy or any of the other Repug candidates would make mincemeat out of Obama in the presidential debates.

The media is becoming even more strident in managing this Primary by telling us lies and half truths. It focuses on anything it can blow up to make the candidates fight. Who will you believe? Them or your own evaluation made following perusal of the facts?

Now the media mavens are breathlessly telling us that Barack has the highest likeability of any of the Dem candidates. Seems that was one of the principal reasons why people voted for George Bush – we ask them: “How did that work out for you?”
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, November 16, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 047


This strike by the writers will surely deprive many of their TV entertainment as sitcoms and other shows like “24” fall by the wayside. No problem as most will just turn to movies or other shows on CDs.

But we must not forget those who will really suffer – the young, the unthinking or the stoned that depend on The Daily Show/Leno et al for their political information – they will be collateral damaged.

Of course some of the affected can satisfy their thirst for political humor just as other groupies do by following their candidate around wearing uniforms, yelling “Fire it up!”, “Let’s kick her ass!” and buying cute nutcrackers.

But for the comedy deprived masses, there is hope and we offer some of it here. If humor is your bag, just check out cable news. While at first glance you may not see anything very funny, the trick is to switch channels every two minutes and compare the similarities and discrepancies.

With a little practice you will find yourself making up Daily Show segments all by yourself. Then soon after you’ll be doing stand up routines for your friends that would be the envy of the late-night-talk.

This does take a bit of effort but it is well worth it. To get the hang of it start out with FOX and then click to CNN or NSNBC. You’ll be a pro before you know it and ROTFLYAO.

It’s really funny watching Tucker exhibit his abysmal ignorance or Wolff trying to show he isn’t biased or the multitude of monstrously bosomed FOX Twinkies solemnly reading opinions so obviously beyond their comprehension.

You may prefer reading the blogs, especially those that have illustrative pictures, but to really get the full flavor and fun, try a newspaper. This will be a real challenge if you have forgotten how words look that you learned in school since you got immersed in txt mes. Keep at it because it will come back to you and also most newspapers have a page of comics for mental relief and illustrated help for the harder words.

If you need more comedy fix, here’s a couple of screamers from Media Matters. They are sure to crack you up.

Matthews claimed "Clinton people ... trying to intimidate" Blitzer -- after Blitzer had denied itMSNBC's Hardball host Chris Matthews began his November 13 show by asserting that "the Clinton people" are "trying to intimidate" CNN host Wolf Blitzer, who is scheduled to moderate a November 15 Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas. But less than an hour earlier, Blitzer had said on CNN's The Situation Room, "No one has pressured me. No one has threatened me. No one is trying to intimidate me. ... No one has even called me to try to pressure me or anything like that. ... I have not felt any pressure whatsoever." Later during the same edition of Hardball, Matthews referred to Blitzer's denial but misrepresented it. Read more

Wash. Post's Kurtz pointed out "liberal bloggers[']" criticism of Russert debate performance, but not Russert's faulty questionsWashington Post media critic Howard Kurtz wrote that NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert "was ripped by liberal bloggers" after "he repeatedly pressed Hillary Clinton during a presidential debate." But Kurtz did not note that at least two of the questions Russert posed to Clinton included falsehoods. Read more

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, November 09, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 046


Never thought it would be true, but Hardball was a thrill to watch following the Philly debate. It was because Craig Crawford stood up to, and beat down Chris Matthews who claimed that “Hillary played the gender card” and he “had the sound-bite that proved it”.

Crawford insisted, even as Matthews typically tried to yell him down, that she did not play the gender card in that sound-bite. This forced Matthews to play it again and it was obvious that all Hillary said was that her college trained her to compete with the boys in the presidential race.

The people who called the debate a pile-on and gender driven were ALL OF US out here in the electorate who called, e-mailed or wrote to the Clinton campaign and NBC protesting Russert’s actions. It was the media that instigated a pile-on and misrepresented what happened afterwards by blaming their own press reports on the Clinton campaign.

Anyone who forms their opinion on anything reported by a media, that intentionally intends to run the race to make as much nasty news as possible, is brain dead.

The post debate game show put on by Obama himself is noteworthy only because the media amplified it without any of the critical comment it reserves for other Democratic candidates. Edward’s disingenuous ad showed Clinton giving somewhat different answers but did not include the questions that elicited those answers; the media ignored that.

Obama came out with a back slapping; “look what I did to Hillary” attitude that belied the fact that he had to be coached by one of the moderators. To paraphrase, he was carried to third base on the misleading attack questions by Russert, Edwards and Dodd and now he claims he hit a triple.

All he really demonstrated in that debate was how easily he is led from his declared path, showing that he is a follower, not a leader who can think and operate by himself.

When Barack declared that he had been piled-on because he was different in a former debate and did not protest, he and the ass kissing media failed to report that whereas he endured for around 15 minutes with NO black code words used against him; Hillary endured for 2 hours with plenty of gender code words used.

And following the debate, facing a barrage of gender code words that every woman recognizes having heard them so often; code words such as “you’re overreacting” and “taking this personally” from the media and fellow candidates.

In addition, Barack was not attacked by one of the moderators. Wonder what trick or misleading questions the media will dig up for the next debate and if the moderator will join in to coach Obama like Russert did.

Russert was characterized by the New York Times on October 31 as "arguably" Clinton's "third toughest opponent on the stage" during the October 30 debate

If the media disregards the facts brought forth by the archivist of President Bill Clinton’s papers and continues to claim Senator Clinton is hiding them, voters should get angry and insist that the truth of this situation be reported.

So much is made of Hillary’s votes yet Barack is not censored for missing three times as many votes as Hillary. Is avoiding voting Barack’s way of avoiding leadership or showing no courage of his convictions?

Governor Bill Richardson got it right in that debate when he described what the Times called “a withering attack”. He scolded the others. “You know what I’m hearing here, I’m hearing this holier-than-thou attitude toward Senator Clinton. It’s bothering me because it’s pretty close to personal attacks that we don’t need.”
The problem is it was just what the media ordered and orchestrated.
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, November 02, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 045


Just like most countries America has a macho culture despite the efforts to put perfume on the pig. This is clear right now in the run-up to each Party’s primaries, our history and the direction most of the media takes.

It’s all about winning and not about facts. We fight wars and equal rights with similar determination. Polls may show a large majority against the war but ask the question in terms of winning or losing and they hedge their bets – that is, they nuance.

Nuance has become the word du jour, serving all candidates by letting them say a lot without taking a firm stand. While at first blush this seems reprehensive in fact it is necessary. American media excels in “dammed if you do; dammed if you don’t politics”.

When a candidate actually makes a point of addressing the concerns of a particular voter, that reply is locked in, scanned for inconsistencies, related to former positions and mangled to the point that all clarity is lost.

Early on in this campaign, Maureen Dowd set the stage as a conflict between warrior and peacenik - Hillzilla vs Obambi. What? A male Bambi; a female Godzilla! This presents a classical conflict situation diametrically opposed to conventional wisdom – a puzzling dichotomy for many to get their heads around. Why?

We are so caught up in our deeply embedded stereotypes that we do not seek the cause of our gender prejudices. Consider why it is that a woman is elevated in rank and stature by marriage to a man above her in rank while a man is diminished in rank and stature when he marries “beneath him”. Or why a woman who marries a King becomes a Queen while a man who marries a Queen becomes a Prince.

The Dem’s testosterone rising fueled by hate and prejudice is clearly seen in the way the Netroots blasted their former hero blog, The DailyKos, because Kos recently wrote positively about Hillary Clinton.

The viciousness of their attack was clear. You either agree with us or we will destroy you. Does this remind you of anything? Anything like Bush claiming that any opposition to him or his way or his plans is treason and punishable? It’s bad enough that Bush and Republicans use scare tactics but must Dems emulate them?

The Democratic Philly debate this week produced another testosterone storm. For weeks Hardball Matthews has been calling for Barack and John to use Hillary as a punching bag. He actually gave them a script claiming that the only way they could stop her was to “bloody” her.

They were not very effective until one of the moderators, Tim Russert, acting as if he was one of the candidates, entered the debate. He initiated personal attacks against her and then called on Barack and John to follow his lead. Huffpost blog even put his picture in with the pummeling candidates of the debate – very effective.

These attacks coming at her all at once from several sides did unnerve her momentarily so that Matthews got what he was hoping for – lots of footage and soundbites.

Breitbart wrote, “And if those attacks were to bear fruit, it may be Democrats as a whole, desperate to reclaim the White House, who pay the price for Tuesday's debate next year.”

Repugs are estatic. They know the only Dem that can beat them is Hillary so they have insisted that she can’t be elected knowing that naive and gullible Dems like Obama and Edwards will echo their suggestion.

Overall, the media reaction ranged from claims that Hillary was rightfully challenged to opinions that the battering was negative and would not go down well in Iowa. In any event, the pig was de-perfumed; our misogynist underbelly culture emerged raw, unfurled and unmasked – Godbama’s manhood demanded that he kill Bambihill. In his primitive rage he forgot that he had pledged not to go negative.

We send kudos to Governor Richardson and Senator Biden for trying to stop the verbal assault when Russert instigated personal attacks and Edwards, Obama and Dodd followed his direction.

Both of these Senators strongly announced that the enemy was the Republicans and condemned their fellow candidate’s negative attacks. Where it is acceptable to challenge the leading candidate, personal smears and Swiftboating is not.

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site: